Basics of Britain
Is a DVD a necessity? A car a luxury? Are cigarettes an indulgence? Is the odd glass of wine part of a decent life?
The Joseph Rowntree Foundation's (JRF) attempts to define the minimum income necessary for an "acceptable" living standard is bound to provoke argument. But they won't mind one bit.
For decades those organisations with an interest in people living at the margins have held on to the concept of 'poverty' - absolute poverty, relative poverty, the poverty line.
But the word inevitably prompts a chorus of derision, because the poverty of Darfur looks nothing like the poverty here. How can you compare someone with obesity and a plasma screen to someone with malnutrition and no shoes?
So JRF have looked at it another way: what do we think is acceptable as a minimum standard of living in 21st Century Britain?
Now, this is a cultural and social question rather than a matter of survival. And as such, it forces us to think quite hard about the way we live.
A minimum standard of living involves a degree of socialisation and cultural life. Never being able to go out or buy yourself a chocolate bar is "unacceptable" in a rich country like ours. We demand the wherewithal to have a diet that is nutritious, a home that is warm and the choices to participate in wider society.
To assess what a minimum income standard might look like, 11 panels of "ordinary people" from different social groups - pensioners, single mums, families with children - were asked to look at everything that a household would need. From a bath to broccoli. Pillowcases to porridge. From night clothes to a night out. Where would they draw the line between luxury and necessity?
Well, the answers make intriguing reading (pdf,0.24MB).
In 2008, home access to the internet is a "luxury" for all except families with secondary school-age children. Free surfing at the library is enough for the rest.
But I wonder how long that will remain the case? At what point will modern life require almost permanent access to the web? Perhaps, for some, we are there already.
There are some interesting anomalies in the lists - almost moral judgments. Cigarettes are a luxury. But all the groups decided that alcohol was an essential treat. The pensioners' group decided that a weekly can of stout was vital.
A single mum is entitled to a bottle of wine and a couple of cans of beer each week. She can indulge on a Kit Kat once every nine weeks and a Twix once every three-and-a-half. There is also £15 a week for social activities.
The panel concluded that a couple with two kids should be able to spend a minimum of £360 on Christmas and £450 on birthdays.
JRF told the panels "to exclude items that may be regarded as 'aspirational'
- it is about fulfilling needs and not wants". So a single adult needs a pair of trainers, but the budget is £20 a year. They will have to save up a long time to get a pair of the latest designer running shoes.
This is a fascinating distinction. We need "stuff", the panels agree: DVD, Freeview, CD player and our telly. But we don't need the "right stuff".
The JRF hopes that this new measure will become an international standard for developed nations, allowing the debate to move on from dreary arguments about whether you can be poor if you smoke.
But the panels' deliberations also reveal something telling about the way we live today. In trying to identify the requirements for social participation, the research has painted a detailed picture of contemporary life. From Marmite to muesli, pull-up nappies to reduced-fat spread. This is about the basics of Britain.
I'm 
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~57~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
Its alright for them to say a car is a luxury BUT we dont all live on London were public transport is pretty good.
I live 9 miles from work, using public transport here (Middlesbrough) would take over 2 hrs... and involve 3 bus journeys and a 20 min walk! A car necessity or luxury?
Complain about this comment
These people are living in cloud cookoo land when they say that a car is a luxury, let them explain how i am supposed to get to work at 5.15 AM, there is no public transport in Plymouth at that time, and it is no use saying move closer to work,that is not an option
Complain about this comment
A car really is needed in the country, but it really depends how much of the people they surveyed actually live in the country. Once again, just like the BBC, this is something which is biased towards the South of England (and its good transport links) and townies.
Alcohol is not a necessity though, people can brew their own...
Complain about this comment
What a waste of time. Are these people living on another planet. It looks to me as if they are planning to cut the old age pension even further.
Complain about this comment
I think Internet access should be seen as a necessity. It gives un-paralleled access to free information and services.
Also it allows people to carry out more admin tasks online such as banking etc. cutting down on the need for trips and hence making living without a car easier.
I would certainly think internet access is more important than a dvd player.
Complain about this comment
I just saw the piece on the 10 o'clock news and I was amazed.
A car is a luxury?
I'm not sure how I or many people I know would get to their places of work or see their family and friends?
Do I scent a London biased survey?
£13,000 to live a good life for a single person?
When you take out rent, a car (sorry, that is needed) private health cover (Dental, Optical, not covered by the NHS) Gas, Electric, water, mobile phone, internet access, PC to access the internet, AV software protection for PC, Petrol (car again) road tax (Car again) servicing (car again) new tyres (car again) new brakes/other consumables (car again) saving in case something goes wrong with your car (I'm beginning to see why there was, no doubt, a great deal of pressure to get the car removed now!) food, clothing, council tax, oh and were all suppose to have a private pension now too?
There's not really much change there is there, to do anything other than survive.
But survival is all that Brown seems to think we are worthy of.
I assume this £13,000 a year figure is used when calculating MP's expenses?
Oh no, a lot of things suddenly become essential then I am sure.
What a joke, but fitting for a joke of a government ruling over what was once a great, but now a joke of a country.
Complain about this comment
Having just watched the article on the news at ten regarding whats luxury and whats not. I have to say i am really annoyed. I live in daventry in northamptonshire, but i work in coventry in the west midlands. Having a car for me is NOT a luxury but a important factor weather i can work or not! Its ok for these people to sit in the middle of london with tubes, trams, buses, taxis at their fingertips but what about us people who live in semi rural locations who have to have a car. People say why dont u get a bus?? thats very easy when you have buses where you live. i dont. we used to have a bus that took us to coventry but that was axed about 5 years ago...wasnt making the bus company/council any money i guess...oh and we dont have a train station in the town either! so im sorry but i dont agree that a car is a luxury. especially seeing as the amount of tax this "government" put on petrol, i dont see it as a luxury not when it costs me over £250 a month in fuel! get a grip and get out the M25 things are are alot different!
Complain about this comment
Well I find this list of essentials/luxuries interesting but again it really ignores those of us not living within the M25. Its also very condescending. Here in deepest S.Devon a car is essential- three of us would certainly not be able to get to work on public transport- our only option would be to move ( and funnily enough the housing market would seem to preclude that at the moment) but even then one of us would not be able to use public transport. Should ancient rural communities be left to die? As for using the interent at the library - well thats ajoke since ours was closed a year ago - we would need a car to get to the nearest one and then have to spend hours waiting for the bus home!
The gulf between rich and poor has widen more than ever in new Labour's Britain and to think we cheered in May 1997
Complain about this comment
On the Joseph Rowntree website the 'Table 1: Summary of the MIS budgets for four family types' shows a budget of £52 per week for rent for a single person. I, as a single person, currently pay £143.50 per week - nearly 3 times that amount, and I am not aware of even being able to rent the smallest room for £208 per month, at the very least £450 (£112.50 per week) - again more than double the cited amount. I fail to understand how this is a minimum income standard, on the basis that anywhere in the south of England you would severely struggle to gain a roof over your head on such a budget.
If I had the minimum budget of £158 per week for a single person, and the cheapest rent possible in my area (around £450), then I would be left with just £46 per week to afford food, utilities and council tax. With council tax costing £20, the water and electricity costing £20 - am I supposed to eat on £6.
I can't help feeling the south was missed in this study, and that an average of the country misses the point of a north/south divide in the cost of living.
Complain about this comment
A car a luxury? Looks like this was conducted in suburbia - they should come and live with me for a bit! One bus per hour starting at 8am and it doesn't take me anywhere near work! Not a luxury to me - a car is downright essential for getting to work and I'm sure there's plenty more of us forgotten rural folk who would agree!
Complain about this comment
I find this study some what disturbing, I am a 26 year old who has just graduated university and live in London, currently I am just surviving on a wage of £16,000.
I am wondering if this study took into account those who have a student loan debt hanging over their head, let alone the cost of public transport for london.
After tax and NI I recieve around £1060 from that £540 goes on rent, £150 for a travel card to get into work, £300 after bills and paying off other debts which came from being a student. This is not accouting for the student loan repayments I will have to repay shortly.
that leaves me £70 a month to buy food and going out (which I cannot afford).
So I am asking how could I possibly try to survive on £13000 a year?
Complain about this comment
I am assuming the groups were in somewhere like London. Where I live on the south coast, driving is essential as I would not be able to get to any work. Before I passed my test it once took me 4 hours and 3 train changes to get somewhere that was just over an hour's drive away. I got into deep debt and lost my house over not being able to get to jobs. I put the last of my earnings from one into passing my test, and since then have been having no problem finding work and will be totally out of debt this year.
My fiancee is out of work. She missed a job interview recently because she allowed only an hour to catch a 20 minutely bus to get to a train station. She was at the stop for 3 hours. We live in a large town, not a remote hamlet.
Complain about this comment
This is quite an interesting issue being raised here. I belive that everybody is entitled to a good quality of life. Having said that, I belive that people should earn their income and not (with want of a better word) 'sponge' off the state; living off benefits for example.
I also belive that the minimum wage should be risen because of the rise of the price of fuel and living in general.
Complain about this comment
It would appear that what some people consider important and essential are in fact luxuries. A car to a lot of people is vital particularly as public transport in many areas is a joke.
Complain about this comment
A car may well be a luxury item for an urban lifestyle where taxis and trains and tubes are frequently accessible. In a rural village when you have a bus service on a saturday if you are lucky then it is most definately a necessity. If you have children going to school when there is no school bus and no shop then a car is the only form of transport. If a husband and wife both work - which again is a necessity in this day and age then you actually find two cars are a necessity rather than double the luxury.
Complain about this comment
What utter tripe. So a Bottle of wine is important? Most people on a low income can't afford that. Why on earth exclude the cost of rent and travel? Cars are not important! Tell that to the people who have been promised a bus connection since Beeching and haven't got one. Now if they include the cost of housing which is a minimum of £125 the figure soon rises to £19,500 as the bare minimum. People can't save. Part of the problem is taxation under PAYE because deductions for savings aren't tax allowable. Time the foundation got real
Complain about this comment
This is complete tosh! £13,000 per annum so the bank will lend me 15 times my annual salary to buy a house then? Rubbish! It obviously does not include the cost of rent or a mortgage.
We all know Britain is *not* richer, as Mark maintained on the BBC 10 o'clock news. We have over-borrowed and have credit card debt, and while our salaries have increased at 3% we all expect our houses to increase in value by 30% year-on-year; remortgaging or borrowing from our future pension funds does not make Britain rich. It's a big con.
As for cars, my car is an ABSOLUTE NECESSITY. My half hour commute by car would be replaced by a bus trip to the train station, train journey, then taxi at the other end - a cost of 5 times more, and adding 90 minutes to my journey time.
Or perhaps, I am expected with my £13,000 income to sell my house and move nearer to my job, and get a £400,000 mortgage in Essex??? Dream on ...
Complain about this comment
The term "Poverty" is absolutely inappropriate in the UK.Poverty is not having enough to eat or a roof over Your head.How can people who smoke,drink wear trendy clothes and live on junk food be poor ?.What they may be is poor finacial managers.
To call this Poverty is an insult to the genuine Poor of the World.The Poverty Industry has to paint a dire picture to justify it's existance.
Complain about this comment
I am a 44 year old disabled widow, I am on disabilty benefit which is not counted as part of my income. The gov says I can live on £91.75p per week so any other benefit I recieve money is taken off of me to bring my income back down to that amount. As for a car being a luxery I can not walk or use public transport as this causes me pain so the car I have comes out of my disabilty benefit and that costs me £46 per week and these people can suvrey and say what you need to live on Id like them to live on the amount that I have to and pay the bills.
Thank you
Complain about this comment
Having just seen your report on BBC News, I was fascinated to hear the proposed "minimum" figures of £13.000 per year - i.e. £26.000 for a couple!!
Having been made redundant a while back, we as a couple are not receiving any more than £92.80 a week as this is apparently what the Government says we need to live on.
So lets do the sums:
£92.80 per week = £371.20 per month
= £4,454.40 per year.
So, £21, 545.60 short of what this report says is the "minimum" we need to live on.
(Oh that's for food, house, clothing, all the utility bills etc. etc. etc.)
So what's going on????
John
Complain about this comment
The body of the website suggests the necessary income for a single adult (13000) does not include housing costs. But the breakdown of the cost of living says it's 157 per week (also excluding housing) - which comes to just over 8000 per year. Firstly, that's a bit confusing. What does the other 5000 go on?
IF that 5000 is for housing costs (even though the site says it's not), well it wouldn't get you much in London (where I live). A typical rent for a one-bed flat (presumably where a single adult should be allowed to live) is now somewhere in the region of 250 per week (using the government's own Local Housing Allowance). This exemplifies one of the main problems for the low-waged in London. Housing benefit has to take into account market rents. Wages, apparently, do not.
I wrote to a housing minister to make this point. Not surprisingly, the gist of the letter I got back was 'we can't control the market'. Which isn't a lot of help. 'Reasonable' incomes - if they are to mean anything at all - have to take into account what people HAVE to pay.
Complain about this comment
I note that for OAPs a car is a luxury, as is surfing the net. That shopping is not to be done by collection by car or on line (unless one can make their way to a library, obviously on a free bus pass!). It seems to me that it solves the problem of an increasing OAP population crisis as most OAPs cannot carry their essential shopping or afford the 'occasional taxi'. Well we've all paid taxes for all of our lives and not are being told that all we can expect is a bottle of stout. But how are we going to be able to collect this!
Complain about this comment
Have these people ANY idea of how expensive it is to live in this country in 2008? £13K acceptable for a single person? I am single with no children, I earn £16K. Out of my gross monthly salary of £1,333, I actually take home just £1,058. The local council then relieve me of another £125 and by the time I have paid all the other bills over which I have no control such as mortgage, gas, electric, etc, I am left with just £69 per week to live on. That's for food, clothes, anything that needs doing in the house, holidays, the lot, all the things that any person in full time employment and living in the UK could reasonably expect to have. It now costs me £58 to fill my car up, I live in an area with zero public transport so what am I supposed to do? My choice these days is simple, food or petrol, not both. I live on stir fry vegetables and cabbage most of the time because I cannot regularly afford decent food. If the Government did not take so much away from me, I could actually have a reasonable standard of living, but as it is, I'm taxed into poverty whilst the rich get richer still. It's all very well for the people on these panels who are probably quite comfortably off and simply assume that everyone can live as they do regardless of what they actually have to spend. The Director of my firm was quite horrified when he found out that some people really don't fly first class when they go on holiday, but then he earns £11K per month...!
Complain about this comment
I live in London and last year I decided to train as a Horticulturalist. I read in many publications that there's a need for trained people in this industry. Imagine my surprise now, when looking for a job in this field of work, to realise that the average salary for a certified Horticulturalist is £5.50 an hour!!! And that that of a Head Gardener is £18.000 a year!! ? What about the so called minimum standard of living? I already live in a shared house, ie a room..I don't have a tv set, I never go to the movies and very seldom eat out. I have lived like that for the past three years and during that time I had a local gov. job that paid twice as much as I am about to get as a Horticulturalist......It is outrageous.
Complain about this comment
This is genius..........
How can anyone "expect" anything? Hows about If you dont, you get nothing? Would save all my wages getting taken for taxes for a start.
Licencing needs to be brought in for getting pregnant also. If you cant afford it yourself without benefits from the state, then you cant have children.
Its all simple really, who do these people think they are.........NOTHING is a right where consumables stand, you have to work for everything, but it seems we have forgotten that. Benefit culture has destroyed this country and its about time we stopped propping up the wasters.
Get a Job.
Complain about this comment
I think there's a bit of confusion here. The government did not conduct this study, the Joseph Rowntree Foundation did - an independent research organisation. They didn't proscribe what people should consider luxuries, but asked people what they thought. If people would take the time to find out, they'd learn that the main research was based in a range of towns and cities in the Midlands: Northampton, Derby, Kidderminster, Leicester and Loughborough. Notice that London is not in the list. People simply love to whinge and complain. Bothering to check the facts would make that so much more difficult, I guess.
Complain about this comment
At a glance, their methodology looks absurd: how can you assess the importance of single items separately? A TV is perhaps a necessity on their terms, unless you have internet access. In this case, is a DVD player a necessity? And so on. As people have already pointed out, the same applies to transport. Given that and the regional variations in housing etc., I don't think there's much to be gained from debating their findings.
Perhaps the Joseph Rowntree Foundation might instead consider giving their research budget to people who they think can't participate in society. Personally, I could use a new pair of trainers.
Complain about this comment
income distribution needs some urgent work.
how can any business justify paying a bonus, if the bonus has in part been achieved by paying people below the poverty level.
have we gone to far down the "bonus road"
Complain about this comment
According to the BBC report Internet access is not an essential, but a pay-as-you-go mobile 'phone is. So why does the BBC invite comments on their blog and not by text? Is this yet another example of the in-built middle class assumptions of the BBC. News by the middle class for the middle class? Pensioners and working-class need not join in?
Complain about this comment
Like many of the other commentators, I too view a car as a necessity, not a luxury.
I currently drop kids off at school at 9am, drive to work to arrive around 9.45. The equivalent bus service, assuming it is running on time, would get me to work for around 10.30.
On some days, I leave work at 2.45 to get back to the school for 3.15 (sometimes a little late due to traffic). This means I work for about 4.75 hours. If I had to leave work in time to catch a bus (rail is not an option - no stations anywhere near my home town - all closed by Mr Beeching!!), I would have to leave work at around 1.45 - which would be only 3.25 hours at work - thus losing 1.5 hours per day.
I then try to make up the time on other days when my husband finishes his own work early to collect the children from school. I often stay until 7pm. Buses after 6pm are less frequent, so I would be unlikely to get home before 8.30pm - by car I would be home no later than 7.30pm as the roads are traffic free by that time.
For me, public transport is simply not an option.
My husband would have similar problems as he can drive to work in about 20 mins, but public transport takes around an hour - and is not exactly cheap either.
I would class a car and internet access as more of a necessity than a dvd player, multichannel tv or a weekly bottle of wine.
Internet access makes managing finances much easier and can also be used to order goods, including weekly shopping, online for home delivery at less cost than a car, or taxi, would be to visit the shop direct.
I only had 4 tv channels until early this year and never had a problem finding something to watch. Any interesting programmes were recorded to watch at a convenient time and with a busy lifestyle, including two young children, we had more than enough to watch in the limited free time we had available. The children made use of a collection of DVD's and videos - but I'm sure they would not have missed them if we hadn't had a DVD player in the first place. It is now a luxury to have more choice - but we don't spend any longer per day watching tv, just have less need to record items to watch later.
I don't know who completed this survey, but it certainly doesn't seem to reflect the majority.
Complain about this comment
Just goes to show that these academics are not in the REAL world. A car "not a necessity" perhaps not if you are retired, but who can retire these days! Oh and where do these people on such a low income live? Down here affordable housing is non-existant!
Complain about this comment
Am I missing something? £13k a year before tax doesn't cover the mortgage on my little flat, which is located 90 minutes commute away from my office (necessitating another three grand a year in train fares) because there's no way I could ever afford to live any closer. The station is only four miles away, but since there aren't any buses I have to run a car or add another half hour to the three hours a day I already spend commuting to risk life and limb on a bicycle.
Luckily for me I earn a lot of money, but still not enough to sustain a good standard of living. In fact, most days I think about leaving this country and taking the 35 grand a year I contribute in taxes for no discernable benefit (given that the healthcare I get is so hopeless the majority of NHS doctors go private, any money I contribute to law and order is spent on traffic cameras and the output of our education system is arguably the worst in Europe) to prop up this failing state with me.
This report is a gross insult.
Complain about this comment
'Northampton, Derby, Kidderminster, Leicester and Loughborough.' - If this is where the study was carried out this cannot be seen as a representative study. All towns, none rural locations, all considerably cheaper than anywhere in the south of England or London.
In Derby - maybe I could survive... as there a room can be rented for £60 per week (a quick spot check on rightmove told me that...) - try the south oxfordshire countryside, and it's a laughable joke! £450 is the absolute basic minimum. Go to London, it's even more.
So the answer... do we all go and live in Derby?
Complain about this comment
This sort of research is ridiculous. What about regional variations? Living in London, for instance, must surely have very different implications for what is appropriate to living in Cardiff.
It is nigh on impossible to apply such a mechanical formula to individuals. It is the same half-backed thinking that our dear Government engages in and it is about time that they all grew up.
What is clear is that the economic mirage we have lived through the last 10 years is rapidly coming to an end, a period, and the real gap between what we earn and what we need to live on will soon become worryingly apparent. Has nobody sought to ask how could we have lived through year on year above inflation rises in utility bills, council tax and house prices when salaries have been pegged even below the Government's manipulated figures, without there being an eventual adverse impact?
Answer: Credit through borrowing has masked everything, but unfortunately the merry-go-round has now stopped and we are all now facing the music. We will now see what people really need to live on.
Complain about this comment
I retired at 60, having worked full time since I was 16. I have an occupational pension and my state pension which together total £9000 after tax. Out of this I am still paying off a mortgage. I own a car which is essential to be able to visit my elderly mother in a care home twice a week (no public transport due to its village location) and for the occasional trip out (if I can afford the petrol!) and, of course, I have the same worries over rising energy costs and food costs that we are all experiencing. Now my dental practice for the past 40 years have just notified me that they are opting out of NHS and so the costs of dental treatment will soar. So, it seems that dental treatment will become a luxury I can't afford. I wonder where would this sit on the survey list?
Complain about this comment
I agree with comment #13. A necessity is a job, not 'sponging off the state'.
Wouldn't we be better off if the money put into these stupid studies was put into regenerating British industry and getting people back into work?
On a separate note - according to the report, a necessity for a single mum is a bottle of wine a week, but not a car! Far more important that our single mums get drunk than drive their children to school in safety?
Complain about this comment
A car a luxury?
I live in a fairly large village, work 12 miles away, public transport would cost far more than the 22p/mile my car does, and take around six to eight times longer.
Yes, owning a new Golf GTi in London or dense urban spral with well integrated public transport may well be a luxury, but how about an older, cheaper, efficient car away from large cities? A car that fulfills many requirements from commuting to tourism and trips to the tip on a weekend, while being cheaper, more convenient and many factors quicker than public transport or to a certain extent private hire vehicles.
Surely a luxury should cost more and have no real tangible value if you were without? Yet in my case I benefit hugely and it costs less to own.
Surely for me that makes it an essential, and clearly for others posting their comments here, it is for them to!
The report also contains some other questionable assumptions from what I gather was well collected data. Sounds like a report generated to support the cruddy wishy washy items put on the Consumer Prices Index and RPI to hoodwink us into thinking the ship isn't sinking fast!
Dave
Complain about this comment
here are some facts about the research:
it is based on what ordinary people think is a minimum standard of living, not the view of researchers or academics
these people were from a range of incomes and backgrounds, not just from a single income-bracket
most of them were from the West Midlands, with some from rural Scotland, rural Wales and inner London
the housing rents are again based on actual figures from the West Midlands, which is about average for Britain as a whole
the £13,000 headline figure does include rent as this is the earnings needed for a single working age adult
Complain about this comment
I object to a group of people telling me that I can live on £136 as a pensioner or £201 as a married couple pensioner. People have different hobbies, some may like a beer, go to bingo etc. and others like myself like to go to nature reserves or out to lunch. Young people think when you get old you should go out in large groups,with other pensioners, none or few of which you have got anything in common, People are individuals and do not suddenly become different people when they become pensioners. Therefore they want different things from life, and it cannot be based on some benchmark decided by a mixed group of however many people. I particularly resent being told I do not need a car. Do you know how much taxis cost. Wouldn't leave a lot out of a pension would it. The alternative is a bus, maybe late or not turning up at all. Standing in the wet and having to carry a heavy bag of shopping. I remember doing buses when I was young and it was not a pleasant experience. I am sure Joseph Rowntree means well and is trying to increase the money of people with children. But why do people have so many children if they can't afford them. Why do some husbands disband their families and leave the state to pay for them. I am all in favour for help for people who genuinely have got into a mess through no fault of their own, but what about the ones who spend money like water and borrow too much. Why should the pensioners get less. Their furniture needs replacing too, in fact, after the kids have left home most of the house contents are totally wrecked. Their houses are run down. Unfortunately, all pensioners do not get credits. They are just above the line and have to replace central heating boilers and the like out of their savings, whilst other pensioners who have not put anything by, get all sorts of extras which in the end puts their income above that of the pensioners without credits. I have long wished to express my frustration at the government and to the people who have not bothered to put anything by, so don't tell me that we have to live on £10,000 a year please
There is also the money paid out to immigrants and and criminals. They seem to have more rights than we do. The rich with their two houses, two cars and no tax. I do not resent anyone getting on but the amount of money they take is sheer greed and they are responsible for the credit crunch and we are paying for it.
So Mr. Rowntree I do not agree with your conclusions about what money pensioners should have and your suppositions and what they may own.
Complain about this comment
As someone who was involved with project, could I just clarify something. Mark's report helped bring these findings out by contrasting luxuries with necessities. But the purpose of the report was not to dismiss some items as unncessary, it was simply to say what items constitute universal neccesiities. The groups who took these decisions (all but one from OUTSIDE London incidentally) felt that a car is not a necessity for every family, unlike say a washing machine. This does not contradict the idea that some people cannot do without a car, or to deride people who need a car. It's obviously not a mere "luxury" for everyone, and the report has not labelled it as such.
Complain about this comment
if this report is correct then my benefits are way below this. my needs are food, roof over my head,clothing, internet for shopping cos im diasbled, a car would be good but cannot afford to run one (petrol) as all my money goes on rising utility bills.im lucky if i have 100 mth left for food to keep healthy as i can. i could also do with the winter fuel allowance but because im 50 i got no chance, yet a person older than me but fitter with no health problems gets it how fair is that? plus not all pensioners are poor, some are! i rely on charity handouts as recently my tv died how on earth can i afford £400 for a new one? i dont go out unless someone takes me cos living in a very rural area everything is 40miles away and thats one way. i dont have a social life cant afford one let alone a holiday-i wish
Complain about this comment
Having actually lived on that sort of money (£11500 to be precise) I can say that it is possible and that while it is hard work it teaches you to be very careful with every penny you have. Thankfully now I have moved up the ladder a bit but still hold on to some of the habits.
First thing to go was the car, and before you all cry out I couldn't survive without the car my commutes 200 miles away and I possibly may die on a bicycle I say Knickers. A car costs you money even when it's not moving, especially when its broken. I started cycling and not 1/2 mile to the shops 10, 20 miles each way on roads / cycle paths. You get used to it and its cheap. Sometimes it's faster than driving, sure it's hard work but so is overtime just to put fuel in the tank.
Second forget any aspirations about owning your own home, thanks to property developers and estate agents even people on 25k can't afford to buy a house anymore. Single try a house share, sure it's not as good as your own digs but it's cheap the bills are split between all the occupiers of the house and hey you probably haven't got that much stuff anyway.
Forget sky, cable or TV generally, the radios free and so are library's. You can go to the cinema at least 10 times for the price of a TV license if not more if you find a good cheap one.
Trips abroad, why bother there is simply tons to do in this country and if you look around lots of it costs ... Nothing. Museums, Art Galleries, parks, beaches, all paid for by the public purse all free just waiting for you to visit. Sure it's not Alton Towers or Spain but it's cheap, interesting, and quite good fun.
I coped on the really quite low salary for at least 3 years whilst studying part time and paying for the privilege. Now i'm earning almost 2.5 times the amount and I still can't afford to buy a house, oh well.
At the end of the day life is what you make of it, quite often people with low incomes have much more fun and interesting lives that people with stacks of cash and two cars, the problem is we only ever hear from those who aspire to the I need loads of cash view, the rest of us are just getting on with it.
Complain about this comment
Everyone can argue about the figures and what should be on or off the list (for me you can take off everything except food, water, shelter, council tax, heating and lighting). What worries me is how this information will be used. Will the government take this report and increase benefits to this level? If so, I'd not be happy about my taxes being used to fund DVD players, cars and christmas presents. People need incentives to find work, not incentives to remain out of work.
Complain about this comment
The difference between "necessities" and "luxuries" as defined in this report has a bizarre air of post-war austerity about it.
The sample group seem to have some wildly unrepresentative views when the findings are viewed in the context of other research (for example I could point to whole libraries of reports pointing to the unwillingness of the vast majority of motorists to live without their cars) and the timing of the report is very bad indeed. If there's one thing that people feeling the pinch don't need, it's a bunch of academics telling them "Never mind, you'll be fine if you just cut back on chocolate and nights out".
Complain about this comment
Hmmm.
The last couple of years I lived in a shared house in Nottingham, and I think I was living on around £13000 a year, give or take.
Didn't need a car - the buses were fairly good there, otherwise I doubt I'd've managed - but I wasn't completely destitute, either.
That said, I wasn't in a position to save anything, and I'd've had trouble if I'd've wanted to go away much, or travel a lot.
It's true about more rural areas, though. When I was at uni, I had holiday jobs at home, and a couple of summers running I had to get up early and hitch a lift with my dad when he left the house at 7am in order to get where I had to be by 8 or 9, as the buses didn't run that early, which left me hanging around for 45mins at the other end. There's no way I could've done that on my own. Mind you, I couldn't afford to live in my village either, the house prices are much higher there!
Surprised alcohol comes in as an essential, though. What good does it do?
Complain about this comment
Hello. Cars a necessity? Or a luxury?
I have been a single mum working for a newspaper full time for approximately 12 years now. I have a company car because it benefits the tax man and my employer... I wish i didn't have to have a company car in order to do my job because it is classed a as a benefit when the tax person is calculating my earnings. I am therefore not entitled to any help and never have been so in this case - wearing a suit and having a company car only adds to the stress of me paying bills.... I am very proud and took a job that means me travelling farther so that I 'just about' don't justify for any benefits although now I can't afford to pay the petrol to get to work in my company car to earn more money to give to my employer and the tax man... Can people please remember that not all people and life styles are the same.
Ha ha - I laughed after watching the news this evening about a bottle of wine and a bar of chocolate for single mums who work bening a necessity because i can't afford those either... To busy paying tax.
Complain about this comment
Is the bird feeder for pensioners equipped with a trap?, because the way things are going that's how we will be feeding ourselves very shortly.
If this survey was completed by joe public then it was done "tongue in cheek", nobody in their right minds could make these suggestions .
Complain about this comment
We are urged to save hard for a pension only to find that after 30+years the annuity is a pittance as the value of money has eroded. In that time a 3bed semi has changed from £8.5K to £250K. As a graduate I first earnt £100/mth and the mortgage was £40/mth. We had a small car and a landline phone but no TV/DVD/PC. We took out a repayment mortgage and a small 25yr endowment of £3.50/mth maturing at £6.5K ostensibly to pay off the mortgage. When the country went decimal everything doubled in price overnight..I fear the introduction of the Euro and the inevitable prospect of euthanasia. Antiques get broken, valuables get stolen, stockmarkets crash and all thats left is the land we own and won by hard work. Just hope to afford to keep it!
Complain about this comment
Seems way way over the top. Too much. I do not earn half the supposed required amount.
You only have to look at the single pension, under by more than half.
Complain about this comment
An unsurprisingly urban assessment of living needs.
As a 2+2 family living in a semi-rural area we need a car, not only because public transport is dire and unaffordable for a family but because amenities have been centralised.
If we go out it is as a family, because baby sitters are too expensive and we live too far from any relations to benefit from their help.
Croissants are, for us, a treat. We have a television that we rarely watch yet our computer is essential both as a cheap means of keeping in touch with family and finding out what's going on in the world when we have time to look, not when the television companies dictate by their programme schedules.
Chocolate? It's a rare treat too, it has been for years, as is wine and beer. Our mortgage repayments, combined with utility bills and community charge - part of which is creamed off and sent to a "poorer" part of the country, takes the majority of our income. It's an income that is squeezed to the limit, especially now with the changes in taxation and the increases in fuel which have meant that every single thing we need is costing more.
On top of all this, our oldest child is about to embark on a University course at a time when the quality of degrees is being challenged in much the same way as earlier qualifications at age 16 and 18. The only way they will be able to prove intellectual ability is to stay and complete a Masters, with who knows what debts at the end.
Us parents? We have no private pension because we were caught in the middle, having had to pay into the state and work schemes that have been pared down to the minimum, we find ourselves with nothing for our retirement.
Come on Joseph Rowntree Foundation, I admire your work, but you don't seem to be looking at the world through our eyes.
Complain about this comment
This research highlights Government policies as serving to make us all poorer – especially those of us earning less. It portrays the inevitable unintended consequence of 10 years of these Labour policies.
The solution is obvious. We need Government economic policies that will simply make us all richer. This is what we should do:
1. Grand a month tax free. Abolish NI and stop taxing people earning less than £1,000 per month;
2. This means we abolish the useless tax credit system which is expensive and not used by many for whom it is intended;
3. Promote economic growth. Economic growth means more jobs and more tax collected for schools and hospitals etc., but with a lower rate of tax having to be paid. This partly makes possible the "grand a month tax free" personal allowance.
4. Make travel cheaper by cutting fuel duty, and make more toll roads as alternative for those who really are in a rush. Lower fuel duty will help those outside London keep more of what they earn and will provide a better quality of life. Paying for road usage on congested routes at busy times will mean fewer traffic jams as people not in such a hurry can choose cheaper routes /times of travel.
5. Reduce the cost of rail travel for both taxpayers and fare payers. This would help economic growth as more people could travel more cheaply and further to earn and/or make money. Do this by allowing train operators to own their track and the surrounding land, including stations. They can then develop these into offices, hotels, homes, cinemas, etc. Rents from these developments pay for the capital cost of the rail infrastructure. There'd be no state subsidy and passengers' fares only need cover the marginal cost of travel - namely drivers salaries, electricity, cleaners etc. This is how the rail systems work in Hong Kong, Japan and Singapore where fares have hardly risen in years, without a dollar in tax subsidy.
6. Abolish all the "let offs and get offs" that high rate tax payers and companies receive, published in 13,000 pages of small print contained within Tolleys Yellow Book - the dirge that accountants use to know what they can and can't do for their clients. Obviously, we can't JUST abolish all these let offs. If we do, higher rate tax payers would be better off in North Korea - the resultant brain drain would cause a contraction in the economy that would mean the Roundtree Foundation's research would be about required money per year to avoid starvation. So we reduce the higher nominal rate to one that is palatable and acceptable for those who want to work ultra hard and/or are ultra smart in return for their forgoing those let-offs.
7. SIMPLIFY tax. That means fewer tax inspectors, fewer accountants, who could all then work in productive occupations. That would in turn lead to less Public Expenditure and stimulate a bit more economic growth, contributing to that "grand a month" personal allowance we covet. What's the point of having a graduated tax system? Why not have a simple tax system, without volumes of let offs, a massive personal allowance and a competitive tax rate? Just think how we'd enjoy January more without that irritating, sanctimonious bloke with the gray hair and trendy black polar neck in the poster ads, telling us to remember 31st January? We'd just answer a few questions on a simple web page or a post card: how much we earned that year, less £12,000, times "X" percent. Simple.
8. Abolish all unnecessary government expenditure, including ads about tax forms and units of alcohol. Google the Tax Payers Allowance for a comprehensive list of profligate items we can cut potentially (worth the thick end of £100,000,000,000).
Complain about this comment
I'm self-employed as a translator/subtitler who serve clients all over the world. Please explain to me how I can perform my job without internet access, and how free internet access at the library (20 minutes' walk) would be enough for me. Without internet access (broadband), I could not work, which means that I couldn't make a living, and wouldn't be able to maintain an "acceptable" degree of living.
Complain about this comment
Firstly as a student in London I have lived on less than a hundred pounds a week for over 3 months. £75 rent, £10 food and the rest was going out money, I didn't need transport as I walked everywhere, only an hour everyday.
It is possible!
Secondly at home in rural north-east of scotland a car is totally essential. It would take me an hour to walk to my nearest village bus stop to wait another hour for a bus to take me to a town so that I could wait another hour for a train to the nearest city (taking 40 minutes). Costing me a total of just under 20 pounds.
Inconvenient and uneconomical, imagine that twice a day!
Yet another example of London based samples being presumed as representing the UK.
Complain about this comment
I'm living in a rural part of Hawaii and a car is a necessity. The food prices at the local market are outrageous compared to the two closest towns, Kona and Hilo. Another thing is water filters and anything related to water (pumps,lines,storage tanks, trailers to lug water). They're an absolute necessity too for people who rely on catchment systems.
This whole poverty formula should be broken down into regions. I don't get the whole "One Size Fits All Approach"!
Complain about this comment
What struck me about this report is that it took 2 years to research! What a waste of money.
I wonder if anyone in the JRF research team actually attempted to live the life that they are suggest is acceptable? Probably not.
Complain about this comment
Well what would you expect from a bunch of yogurt niters?
These people really don’t live in the real world.
I work nights in a rural Yorkshire area; it would be physically impossible for me to get to work with out my 8-M.P.G V8 Jaguar…..never mind using public transport….
I don’t drink or smoke…… I would if I could afford too
And if poverty is so bad in this country why do most Do-Gooding charities give what’s left of the money they collect “after paying huge salaries to manager types” send it abroad?
Go on then…. tax me off the road and I will sit on my bum claiming benefits and then I won’t need a car.
Complain about this comment
I have read many of the comments, and therefore surprised at how many did not read the criteria for the survey! It is quite clear that the basis of the report came from "the people", not from academics or politicians.
Complain about this comment
What a way to wake up in the morning with one of the best jokes I have heard and seen for a very long time. DVD player is a necessity while a car is a LUXURY, well well well 2 years of reserch and what do they come up with, Rubish, what a load of rubish. Never seen so much crap in one piece off news. Please please let me go back to bed and start again. it might just be a bad dream that I'm having. (or maybe the cheap wine and the kit-kat that I had last night)
Complain about this comment
The comments posted about this article only confirm why I and my family left the UK to live in Africa.
The UK is too expensive, too crowded and obsessed with owning 'stuff'.
Yes we now have to put up with power cuts but they do give an excuse to get out the BBQ and have a candlelit dinner. The private schools are better (but not free) with no discipline problems and people are friendlier.
Yes you do need a car but you can get about quite cheaply using public transport, (a spirit of adventure needed) and if you break down someone will always stop and help if they can.
The sun shines nearly every day and domestic help is affordable.
I am not a young person, I'm on a State Pension and my wife works. I have two daughters of school age.
Housing is affordable
Finally, the thing that struck me when living in the UK was the chaotic state of the tax system. Something must be wrong when Government taxes it's citizens only to return it in various benefits to even out the inequities it creates!!
Complain about this comment
The part I noticed was the amount that is acceptable to spend on 2 children for birthdays and Christmas. I hope mine dont see that....
how can you teach the value of money to children when it is acceptable to pay that amount on birthdays.
i kind of agree with some aspects but where you live accounts for a lots of it and that has been ignored.
Complain about this comment
I think they're living in cloud cuckoo land. Unless you live and work in a large conurbation with a viable public transport system a car is a necessity not a luxuary unless you wish to spend 2 hours traveling 20 miles each way to work. I've had 3 jobs in 8 years and in each case it would take me 3 times as long to get to work by public transport as it would by car simply because public transport is geared to linear commuting into major conurbations not radial commuting away from them.
As written by another poster the internet is an essential, don't have to waste money buying environmentally consuming magazines and newspapers, but a DVD player is not. These people should get real, get a life, and get a real hobby (or three).
Complain about this comment
You said on the News last night that people can use computers and the internet free of charge in local libraries. Not so! In Dorset only the first 30 minutes is free and then we are charged £1 for every subsequent 30 minutes.
Complain about this comment
I'm pleased to see I'm not the only one who regards a car as a necessity. I'm lucky that I don't have far to travel to work but I live in Scotland and public transport would be useless for me! They can't have asked any teachers (real ones) because they all need a car to cart all their books, jotters and folders!
I don't agree about the internet either. I'm involved with IT and use the internet heavily as a teacher - it's a big part of education these days. Primary children need as much access as older children.
I can't believe 'pensioners' all drink stout! Who did they ask?! I know lots of retired women who don't drink anything of the kind!
Complain about this comment
My wife and myself have lived on a joint income of £15,000 for well over 15 years.We have a mortgage and a car loan,we both have season tickets to our local footie club and we can afford to go to cuba every 3 years to visit friends.
The Uk is a country where people want everything at once, do not know how to budget,how to cook economicallyand,how to have a good time without drink and spashing the cash,also everybody seems to want a new car at 17 instead of getting a moped like i did which enabled me to save for a deposit for a house.
Myself and my wife have never been given a penny in our lives, i myself had not even had birthday presents when i was young, as both my parents where disabled.
I learned early in life you do not need much money to live on and you dont need many peronal possesions to be happy.
Complain about this comment
While I agree the report is utter rubbish a car is a luxury unless you live in a rural community.
How many people travel over 20 miles to work and pass people travelling over 20 miles in the opposite direction going to do the same type of job as themselves?
Perhaps if people didn’t have cars they could all get jobs near where they live; now that would be a novelty, and there would be plenty of these because people living over 20 miles away would be giving them up and looking for work nearer home.
Complain about this comment
On TV you mentioned library internet is free. No longer! Now, only the first half hour is free (not nearly long enough) and it's 75p for each half hour thereafter locally (due to numbers of immigrants using it non-stop) .
At the main library, York, it's £1.00 for anyone not living in town. So we country folk have the cost of travel plus fees. And for those of us who are on pension credit, this makes it a non-starter.
Also - the car is not a luxury if medical problems (eg cervical spondylosis) make being thrown around in buses an impossibility.
We responsible people share transport when we can, but we do need our cars.
Complain about this comment
Adrahil
You sir/madam are a genius
All those people passing each other each morning have never thought the same thing.
So lets all just swap jobs? It's that simple? Everyone earns exactly the same and our jobs require the same training and skills?
And there are lots of jobs within walking distance of where people live?
Your naivety is almost as mind boggling as the JRF's
The model for employment movement patterns used by academics, government and such relies heavily on this assumption though, or that people can easily move from one end of the country to another to the other at the drop of a hat.
I'm happy for you that you can live without a car, but many people cannot.
And they are not used just to go to work of course.
As the study shows that the internet is a luxury then internet shopping is ruled out (unless you want to use you credit card on a public machine at the library, a great idea security wise) then you'll be driving to the shops.
Then you mite want to see family and friends?
Perhaps you have moved to be closer to the best job that you could get (as per your inspirational idea) but this has meant that you are now nowhere near your family, your friends, or your children's school.
Oh wait, it's not that simple is it?
Or shall we use public transport?
Buses are useless for most journeys except getting into town centres, in most places, and take a looooooong time, trains are a little better, if they go to where you want to, but often the don;t and require a change or 2.
And there's the other "cost" that is never mentioned.
Time, how much time is saved by driving?
Time is something only the rich should enjoy?
The rest of use should be working to earn a pittance and pay taxes through the nose.
Just how much of these figures is swallowed up by tax by the way?
Complain about this comment
If someone had taken the time to read the report rather than scan through and pick out a few shocking facts (ones that sell media and get page views) they would have realised that allowances are made for rural areas.
I quote...
"However, for many
rural households, the same level of access to opportunities and services can only be achieved through use of a car and a sufficient allowance for fuel." p. 17
So a car is considered essential for rural areas.
Probably should do your research instead of spreading misinformation.
Look at all the unjustified anger directed at the study due to the failings of the reporter.
Complain about this comment
i would say car is a luxury for most people, even if most living in rural communities.
I live in a village more than 8 miles from any significant town/city, and 12 miles from work and with a very poor bus service. BUt i cycle to work so a car is not 'essential'
Also, commenters might like to note that this is not a government report before they post there usual moans about gordon brown and new labour (enough already!)
Complain about this comment
If people are so hard done by, why are sales of bottled water (an entirely worthless product) still going up?
Complain about this comment
I am on the basic pay rate suggested by the JRF and am constantly on the line between debt and cash.
I cannot afford to buy and insure a car (though could just afford to run one) and so I take two buses to work. I live 10 miles from my place of work and leave my house an hour and a half before my shift starts.
Recently, I moved back into my parental home after time at universtiy as I cannot afford to pay rent, utility bills and council tax alone. I have a dramatically reduced rate at home, thank goodness. My boyfriend did the same, and now lives 25 miles away. This means that what we save on housing costs is re-channelled into travel expences once a week or so to visit each other. Aside from spending time away to see my boyfriend, I socialise on average once a week and spend no more than £20 on a night out at the cinema/pubs. I train with basketball and netball teams twice a week, which costs around £10.
None of my expences are extortionate - I rarely allow myself luxuries other than a new item of clothing when needed every couple of months or so. Despite this, after pulling in just over £200 a week I am only ever left with £50 a week to save at most.
I believe, from my own and peers' experiences, that the biggest cost issues for UK residents are currently clothing, travel, tax and insurance.
Having said this, I also see that there are too many people in this generation of which I belong that want their own life, the way they want it down to a perfect tee, right now. There is a lack of patience and abilitiy to suck it up and save. The world has been hit by recession and economic depression before. We should do what it takes to get through these tight times, in spite of actions by corporations and the government.
Complain about this comment
I work 40 hrs a week and now that all my monthly payments (direct debits etc) are payed I am left with less than £3 (in pennies out of my 'piggy bank') to survive on until my next payday (25 July), when it all starts again. Does that make me poor?
Perhaps Mr.Darling would be kind enough to advise me on how to "tighten my belt"(sic) and spend my £3 wisely over the coming weeks?
Complain about this comment
Re: cars
They are the only reliable, safe form of transport available to most people out side of city centres and lovely rural area with nice quiet roads.
I would dearly love to cycle to work, and maybe if everyone else did I could, but as it stands I would probably be dead within a 6 months as the 2 choices of route to my work (only 8 miles away) are a B road which has a fatal RTA at least once every 3 months (seriously, it's a crazy road and an ideal spot for a speed camera if they are serious about safety) or a duel carriageway the is used by HGVs and links junctions on the M1 and has a new junction added every other week for new housing developments.
In a few somewhat more specific circumstances I can see how cycling mite work, especially for those in villages where most of their family and friends probably live within a mile or so, but people move around for work more now than ever before. Cycling to see friends and family and work is just not possible (I believe) for most, but it is great for those of you who can work this out.
The main thing that a car brings however is freedom.
There is no other form of transport (baring a helicopter perhaps?) that can take you to wherever you want to go, whenever you want to go there, other than the car.
It's this freedom, above the time that driving saves me (I'm not the fastest cyclist) that I think is essential and something that everyone should have the chance to enjoy.
Complain about this comment
A minimum standard of living involves a degree of socialisation and cultural life. Never being able to go out or buy yourself a chocolate bar is "unacceptable" in a rich country like ours.
Firstly I ask, Why?
Why does th fact that we live in th UK entitle us to anymore than anyother person?
I am all for globalisation as I feel there a good percentage of ungrateful people outhere that believe they desreve better yet they prefer to moan than do.
The people that sit in the ofice and think that checking Facebook or Hotmail every two minutes is work and so they desrve more than minimum wage because they can't afford to live, the same people who wonder why they cant buy a house but can afford to spend £50 to £100 a week on socialising and alcohol.
If achivements such as buying a house was meant to be easy we would all being doing it thats what sets some of us apart, it is call sacrifice.
We are living in the generation of buy now pay later, and he has a nice LCD screen so I want to buy one. People think they because someone else has something they should have it too but what they forget is what does that person sacrifice to get that.
We managed to buy a nice 2 bed flat this year in Edinburgh, I work full time my partner part time and are 25 so it is not as difficult as we all think to succed but to make ends meet we rent a room and barely go out but we dont complain because the sacrifice is worth it, that is what is it about.
If you want things in life you have to go out and fight for it, go and get it as it is not going to come to you.
Complain about this comment
This seems to me to be socialist dogma, unsurprising from something named after Rowntree, the idea of needing a certain level of comfort for 'society' - sounds like a case for increasing benefit, I agree with raising pensions, because frankly they aren't enough (not a pensioner) but this is just flawed stats and creating unrealistic averages
it doesn't consider regional issues - clearly many people don't 'need' a car, if you live in a city or large town then you're ok, but trust me, out in the villages we need cars - i guess we should all be living in urban centres tho (and i live in the SE by the way, it's not all London) - without however-many-thousand-quid i spend on my car I wouldn't be leaving the house much, maybe i could cycle the 5 miles to the nearest train station, which is a village (ie not a lot of stops) station, I'd be severely limited, but if i was that poor then maybe i'd have to do that - i guess people should stop being awkward and live in manageable urban areas
and rent and mortgages are far higher than they suppose, again regional differences - the London allowance comes to mind, but also check ridiculous property prices in Cambridge and Leeds, you'd be lucky to get a bedsit
benefit is to exist - it should be spent on food and necessary fuel and clothes, not alcohol - however much you like it, you don't need it - limit yourself, by darfur standards that's pretty princely
Complain about this comment
the report points out that the minimum wage would need to rise to £6.88.
is that for working at night or during the day?
does the same rate apply for working on a saturday and sunday, and for working overtime?
should it be the same rate for starting at 6a.m and 9a.m and finishing at 5p.m or 10p.m
is it time to ask the low pay commission to look into low pay for all.
Complain about this comment
Does anyone know where you can rent/buy a house suitable for 2 adults and 2 children for £121 a week in the south? A cheap 2 bed house where I live in Southampton would cost around £170 a week. The costs of housing are hidden away in this report but I think that they should represent current maket values not the costs of those who got mortages 10 years ago.
Complain about this comment
The responses to this article show how much people confuse expectations with necessities. We all expect a lot these days and complain loudly when we don't get it - the 'right' to own and drive a car without going bankrupt is just one example.
The key problem is identifying what is meant by a 'necessity'. This study has attempted to do that, but as soon as you move beyond a definition along the lines of "the bare minimum required to survive" you get different opinions from different people.
Those who don't drink alcohol will never see a bottle of wine (or stout!) as important. Those who don't watch movies will be more than happy to see a DVD player as a luxury. Etc. Etc.
And of course those in areas with good public transport don't 'need' cars.
So this is more down to differing views on what individuals consider important to their way of life (hence the pensioners group wanting their stout) - which has very little to do with what any of us actually 'need'.
Complain about this comment
Surely Internet access is more necessary than a TV or DVD player? We manage perfectly well in our family with neither of the latter, but no Internet would make life unliveable.
Complain about this comment
All that is necessary to survive is food, heat, warm clothing, and a roof over our heads, healthcare and education. The rest are luxuries. Some things such as cars have become essentials to some because of our changing lifestyles. i.e. living further out in rural communities etc.
But in a way we have brought all this on ourselves. Because of high car usage in these areas, transport links often aren't built; we have more traffic on roads, which make journeys longer for everyone. We are spoilt compared to those who lived through the war and in third world countries today. We expect and require a certain standard of living. Items such as cars, TVs, holidays. Computers, washing machines which make our life’s easier and more pleasant and that is what we have come to expect and don't want to not have this and why wouldn't we. People live on benefits for years because they can, and because these reports say you are in poverty if you don’t have the same luxuries working people have. But the fact is in some ways our quality of life is less than it was, as we get sucked into a modern materialistic world.
Complain about this comment
When I post here do I sound as whiny, paranoid and self-important as the rest? Probably. Anyway, here is the Rowntree foundation chose their groups:
"The main research was based in a range of towns and cities in the Midlands.
Participants were recruited and groups held in Northampton, Derby, Kidderminster,
Leicester and Loughborough. "
And what the heck has this got to do with Brown or the Guardian?
Complain about this comment
I will ask the question no one else appears to have asked
"Who Commissioned the Survey" and "Who Paid for it"
I think the answer will probably be the Government, dont you agree.......
Well, if it was WHY? The Government are all to quick to tell us what we can earn and spend to why commission these people to tell us again?
Is it because the Government think it might confirm that they are right and we will take it on the chin
How wrong they are and as for the Joseph Roundtree Foundation, try living as a pensioner and finding £201 a week.
From a Yorkshire lass my comment is, you talk a load of first class rubbish
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS